Most of my future posts will be public posts. To leave a comment here, you can either comment anon, which will be screened until I read the comment, use the openid feature, or you can create a livejournal user name. If you wish to read the occasional locked post, you will need a lj username and friend my journal. Eventually, my archive will be mostly public again and properly tagged.

Last night, it was pretty much understood that the amount of time discussing the bill would be practically bare basics and each side would only have two speakers who would be given 2 minutes a piece. So I didn't prepare myself as well as I had originally planned with what my main statement would be if given the chance to speak.

I arrived at just before noon and joined the CalOpen people in waiting for the hearing to begin. Much silliness and lollery was to be had as we waited with no real notification that the hearing had been postponed. Once underway almost two hours late, they still didn't have enough members to form a quarum, by the time this bill was presented we were still two members short. The bill was presented and there was a good number of CARE members in attendance to give their approval, a good handful allowed to have their say, and a good handful only asked to state their name and approval. When the opposing voices got our time, our two designated speakers got to have their say, and the rest of us stood on the side prepared to follow the same "state your name and disapproval" but instead a good portion of us got to have our say. I went first out of the group of us standing on the side. I stated how I was a birthmother and that my son was 13 years old now. He knew he was adopted but nothing really of the family of where he comes from. His original birth certificate was open for anyone to obtain for 16 months after he was born. The 180 days required to finalize the adoption plus an additional 10 months for the amended certificate and sealing to happen. Anyone could have gotten the birth certificate during that time, and his family has that birth certificate in a box that he doesn't know exists. He will have to beg for his original birth certificate. It's his, not mine.

Or at least that is what I remember saying. By the end of speaking I was -->this<-- close to tears. I did my best.

After the statements, the committee asked some questions to Assemblywoman Ma, asking about clarification of dead birthparents and contacting efforts. I do not know if it passed or not.

I've read the analysis for the amendment a few times now, and I'm convinced by the wording that either a staff member of the author or someone championing the bill wrote the analysis for the judiciary committee.

There are some rather conflicting ideas now that I've had an evening to gather my thoughts. For example, the whole thing hinges on the right of privacy for biological parents. But, that being said, if an adoptee has a health issue that is immediate and urgent to be necessary to have the original birth certificate released, there is no mention of the biological parents being notified that the birth certificate is released. Violation of that supposed privacy is okay because of a noble cause, but not enough to notify those that are affected.

Not that I'm all whoo hoo, notify us if that record is released... because I'm not.

The other thing that really bothers me is that the analysis is twisting existing policies as to be representative of protections in place for me, when in actuality were put into place to protect my son's parents. To say that a mutual consent registry is an implication of privacy is bullhockey. I can tell you this from my own experience and from many that have also walked in the same path I have, the one thing that was told to us in the pre-adoption counseling is how once we relinquish our rights to our child, that's it, the child is not ours. Legally we have no ties to our child. Legally our child has no ties to us. It is severed, and there is nothing that can change that fact. I was reminded that our children are curious and will someday seek us out if they want, while the courts seal the records, many adoptees figure out how to get the information they need. I could save my son that hassle by signing the mutual consent registry, and keeping the address current. But regardless, if he was going to seek me out, there really wasn't much to stop him.

So, I went on my way from that meeting knowing the one thing for absolutely certain, once the papers were signed, I would have no legal rights pertaining to my son's life. And yet, according to this proposed law, suddenly I have a right. A right that no other regular parent has over their child's birth certificate. BIZARRE.

I googled as many different ideas as I could after I was reading the amended assembly bill. In order of those initial thoughts and not by order of any importance:

1. Where is my son's privacy? One of the key components to this "compromise" is that apparently my privacy matters. I would have the opportunity to stop identifying information from being released on the birth certificate, but where his privacy to go get this document without having to involve his relatives either adoptive or biological. What a freaking mind f*ck to everyone involved. I have a couple of thoughts on this, one of which is more related to another point, but one directly involved with this asking permission concept. Could you imagine being in my shoes? Out of nowhere a letter comes stating that my son is asking for this document and thus wondering in some part or another about his biological roots to this world. I would be a deer in the headlights wondering if it was only the piece of paper he wanted or if it would be leading to more contact. The rush of emotion of that idea has currently overwhelmed me and it's with no real practical concept of the mind f*ckery of reunion actually is.

2. Timeline of when the original birth certificate is available. Particularly within infant newborn adoption, the original birth certificate is viewable for a minimum of 180 days after birth, but with an additional admittance by the Department of Public Health, it takes an additional 10 months to process an amended birth certificate and seal the original. That is 16 months approximately that anyone and everyone can obtain that original birth certificate. This amount of time is dismissed in the analysis of the bill on pages 8 and 9.

3. The only birthparents who are promised privacy are those who use that awful safe haven now labeled safely surrendered baby law. Those parents are not listed at all on the original birth certificate, and thus creates a whole other heap of questions for the logistics for this proposed law.

4. The age of 25, which I can only speculate as being some sort of throw back to that adults are now not really adults until after they are no longer claimed as dependent student children by the federal government. On a personal note, I worry that if this legislation moves forward that crappy age will become somehow the standard for the mutual consent registry program that the state also handles which is also being used in the analysis as another supposed promise of privacy.

That's my thoughts for a moment. I'm sure I'll be back with more in a few.

I know I've been away for a while. My internets are back, and I have a new topic going round and round in my head right now. Assemblywoman Ma introduced AB 372 in California, and now that is less than a day from being heard by the Judicial committee, the bill has already been compromised. It suggests that adult adoptees (over the age of 25) can request a copy of their original birth certificate and get it if the birthparents are contacted and don't protest the release. That is the bare basics of what is going on, and in order to get my mind fluent and wrapped properly around what is being proposed and what I shall say in opposition to this bill, I'm going to prattle on a bit in my journal. Agree, disagree or poke me with questions, it's all good. The drama llama is invited to come out for these posts.

First the groups, then the blogs.

Apparently the activity is based on this group with the acronym CARE. From what I'm reading in the blogs, the message that their group gives for their intentions has changed dramatically from criticism earlier this month. http://www.ca-care.org/

Because CARE is choosing to admit that they aren't going to get a clean bill passed, and are going to compromise, Cal Open has come back out! http://www.calopen.org/

As for the blogs, the two I was reading last night are:

http://bastardette.blogspot.com/
http://bbchurch.blogspot.com/

I fell down the stairs last night. I made it down two steps and then slid down the rest injuring my back something fierce. I feel as if the stairs became a car and ran me down from behind. My neck, my shoulders and my hips are just aching. It puts a huge damper on continuing to unpack and get this household into shape. =oP Now the goal to survive without moving my body much at all today.

Last night, I was trying to figure out long term planning since the short term planning has been working well. When it is time to enter seminary studies, either I could move down to the bay area with my family, uprooting everyone and seeing our cost of living spike dramatically, or I could commute and miss out on a lot of family time, or I could study from home with occassional commute stays on campus. If I studied from home, I would need to be already participating in an emerging ministry, which happens to be my big idea anyway. So I spent last night brainstorming (much to the approval to Serafina, aka Imagination Mover's biggest fan) every part I could think of about my big idea. Once my computer had finally been turned over by Juliet and Serafina, I was attempting to catch up on two weeks of blog reading when I discovered on Marley's blog that California appears to be about to tackle open records again!

Exciting stuff this is! Never mind that I haven't figured out which assembly member is going to present the legislation, and never mind that I am fearful of the group putting the effort behind this legislation is stating they are willing to compromise access for some adoptees in order for many to have their records. But the fact that it has been so long since the last attempt is darn exciting. I joined Cal Open immediately so that I can keep up with what is going on, and to make sure I am sticking with the group that unapologetically insists on a clean bill with no adopted person's rights being trampled for the others.

The trouble with trying to pick some New Year's resolutions is that it points out the one major problem with following through.  There isn't enough time in the day to do all the things I'd like to do with the amount of focus and detail I'd like put towards it. 

Of the ME!!ME!!ME!! resolutions:

I'd like to be swimsuit fit where I don't put one on and completely want to hide.  Not perfection mind you.
I'd like to knit more and not with my stash of red heart yarn that will outlive the cockroaches.
I want to learn photography and not be such a noob.
I want to write more.
I want to make a serious damn difference in attempting to open original birth certificates to adoptees from California.
I want to read the bible in a year.
I want to find fiction that interests me.
Heck I want to read for pleasure and not necessity.
I want to visit my sister at school.

And that's just off the top of my fluff filled head.

DANCE!  I want to dance ballet.  I can't forget that.  Sigh.

I finished read "The Joy Luck Club" yesterday. I've read the book a handful of times over the years; the first time was required in high school. At the time I had argued with my teacher in her summary of the theme of the book. She felt that this was the story of eight woman who had lived through unusually hard life stories and were attempting to heal from them. I asked the teacher if she had a Pollyanna life and whether or not she herself had any of her personal history stamped with sad tales. It really ticked me off that anyone would look at this book as these women (who still are very much real to me instead of the fictional characters they are) as poor creatures to circumstance.

Now that I'm older, and have learned a lot from lj regarding race, poverty, and peace vs war life circumstances... I get the difference between hardship, but I still feel that each person has their own set of hurt, misunderstanding, and sad tales that we spend our whole life attempting to reconcile.

Anyway, yes I cried once again when Jing-Mei finally reunited with her sisters. Things that stuck out to me this time around reading this book with regards to adoption:

1. The twin girls were given pictures of the family so that they could be returned when found on the side of the road. Even though they never found the family, the girls were raised to revere and love that birthfamily. Sure maybe it was because they came loaded with treasures as a bribe, but I would love to see that same attitude when it comes adoption today.

2. There was a hint of judgment over whether or not Jing-Mei's mom was an awful person for abandoning her twin babies, but it was quickly dismissed as it was a life or death decision and thus she could not be faulted. I have to admit that I am rather tired of this part of being a birthmother.

There is probably more that stuck out to me, but I'm just not thinking clearly because I'm now sick with Serafina's cold and have yet to recover rest wise from staying up to care for her.

I started reading "The Girls Who Went Away" last night after finishing the other book. So far I'm two chapters in and I'm hooked. The interviews so far that have stuck out with me are the ones that were high school age with regards to their relationship with boys around them. I find it fascinating with how our inner voice telling our past stories reverts to sounding exactly how we saw the world at that age. The depth of words and world view changes. Anyway, those interviews and the words just jumped off the page at me, especially when I look at how I saw the world when I was in high school.

I also know I'm just barely into the book, but what also jumps out at me is how in the baby scoop era the girls who went away had no choice and had to follow through. How is it that the difference between then (the era of no choice) and now (the era of plenty of choices) I still relate to these women so strongly? While choice is better than no choice, I don't think the choices are presented over the span of a lifetime as equal nor acceptable. I am of the generation that watched the vilification of welfare mothers. I am of the generation that was taught that having more than two children was world doom according to the population growth. I am of the generation that we are to go to college come heck or high water to amount to anything. None of this was my parents' position on how the world works though. So when my Dad announces that I need to pick a path on what to do about this unexpected pregnancy, I didn't hear choice. I heard "you choose what you are going to do, but you should do this... or else." One of the women in the book talks about when she was held by the social worker in the car until she signed the adoption papers, and how she wanted to change her mind but for every reason she gave as to why she didn't want to sign the papers, the social worker had a more forceful reason as to why that would never work and that all she could do was to sign the papers. I relate to that feeling. The thing is though, not one person did that to me though. At every meeting or discussion about adoption, the other choices were presented. But one girl at 19 cannot fight years of conditioning to know that parenting was the selfish choice at that point. Choice with no choice.

But, the one thing I'm grateful for is unlike the birthmothers before me, I don't have the conditioning to stay quiet. I cannot imagine having this history and not being able to say it out loud to anyone. Even worse is that these women even feel awful for letting their thoughts think about what happened.

Anyway, this book is a page turner for me!